So were Oldham, so where Halifax, Leigh, Workington, Sheffield. I don't believe you support the promotion of aforementioned pathetic clubs (some if not all) back into SL.

The M.E.N. report was more than likely written/encouraged or assisted by Swanny.

And thank you for proving my point that it takes years to sort out. And most them clubs have dropped out of SL and been rebuilt and ran in a better way now than in SL. Whether them clubs are ready for SL is open to question. Likely not but then maybe its best not being in Super League running up big debts when you can make small profits and have success in the championship. SL is a utopia that is ruining clubs. But clowns like you think its so good for the game as a whole that SL is encouraging clubs to waste money. SL is where loads of money from the RFL has been thrown in to help poorly managed clubs. That money could have been better spent on development offficers and the like. I dont personally see how thats so good for the whole game. But keep dreaming away and twisting things to fit your own opinion

Salford are a joke sadly who dont deserve to be in SL. With clubs like Salford, London, Castleford etc there is a strong case for less clubs in SL OR be replaced IF Championship clubs are meeting the minimum standards set out.

The minimum standards??

Which ones? Those applied to SL clubs who need a business plan to turn over £4,000,000 plus a year and 8,000 to 10,000 crowds to fund it or the highly relaxed standards applied to "one championship club will be guaranteed a place subject to minimum standards" of a turnover of at least £1,000,000 (wow!) and 2,500 crowds (breathtaking).

What you miss is your championship darlings currently don't even meet the latter standards, but Castleford, Salford and even London beat them by a mile.

You also raise the silly old chestnut of telling us a club who is not under pressure to compete in the lower division making a few grand on a small turnover is "well managed" and those badly stretched to compete, and pushed to compete against the biggest clubs in Britain are "badly managed".

1. And thank you for proving my point that it takes years to sort out. And most them (championship) clubs have dropped out of SL and been rebuilt and ran in a better way now than in SL.

2. Whether them clubs are ready for SL is open to question.

3. SL is a utopia that is ruining clubs. But clowns like you think its so good for the game as a whole that SL is encouraging clubs to waste money. SL is where loads of money from the RFL has been thrown in to help poorly managed clubs. That money could have been better spent on development offficers and the like. I dont personally see how thats so good for the whole game. But keep dreaming away and twisting things to fit your own opinion

1. Oh my! You have to be joking? Oldham have re-built? Workington have re-built?

This is another old chestnut that you can re-build in the Championship, a league in which crowds actually go nowhere and stay the same as they have always been for years, unless you do well in the league which pulls a few hundred more in. A league in which you feed of the Superleague scraps when it comes to players and if you develop your own you get the lads who couldn't make SL academy. Anyone who slips the net gets picked up by SL. A league in which rich men show no interest in being in.

Is the championship really somewhere where you can build a playing squad build a crowd and build up a large pot of money?

You accuse Padge of "twisting things" but to reason that the Championship is a great place to re-build for Superleague is strangling logic never mind twisting it?

2. You now prove my point. 15 & 16 years on and Oldham and Workington are "not ready". Halifax crashed out 10 years ago.

3. SL has attracted £250,000,000 into the game in SKY contracts and investments from rich businessmen, that's a quarter of a Billion pounds isn't it? I'm not surprised the RFL bend over backwards to shore SL up. I don't see how that's "bad" for the game.

I challenge you and all the other posters on here condemning Superleague to set out a vision for the games future success without this evil thing called SKY that so consumes the game by it's demands?

Which ones? Those applied to SL clubs who need a business plan to turn over £4,000,000 plus a year and 8,000 to 10,000 crowds to fund it or the highly relaxed standards applied to "one championship club will be guaranteed a place subject to minimum standards" of a turnover of at least £1,000,000 (wow!) and 2,500 crowds (breathtaking).

What you miss is your championship darlings currently don't even meet the latter standards, but Castleford, Salford and even London beat them by a mile.

You also raise the silly old chestnut of telling us a club who is not under pressure to compete in the lower division making a few grand on a small turnover is "well managed" and those badly stretched to compete, and pushed to compete against the biggest clubs in Britain are "badly managed".

That is so simplistic it does you no favours.

There are no minimum standards that you describe above regarding revenue and crowds that are applied to clubs in SL through any RFL or SL governance documents. No standards of revenue or attendances are enforced by either governing body.These are your standards that you have developed over your posts in the past 2 - 3 months and they have been repeated so often that they may seem to some like the SL standards!

I hope we can pull through, but it seems increasingly unlikely that we can pull a rabbit out of the hat in time to allow us to be anything other than whipping boys next year. I don't want that. I'd rather we accepted that the impossible dream is over and drop back down to the championship. It is only a game, when all is said and done.

I wonder where I will be watching my rugby next year? The KC? Odsal? Headingley? Nooooooo! I might just start watching York again after a gap of 30+ years.

There are no minimum standards that you describe above regarding revenue and crowds

Read it more carefully. I'm saying these are the sort of sums and attendances clubs need to finance a competitive Superleague club. This is the sort of thing the adequate business plan (which IS a standard) needs to add up to.

This is why (to keep it to Salford )

They are in schtuk, because they don't get those sort of attendances. They said it themselves.

Read it more carefully. I'm saying these are the sort of sums and attendances clubs need to finance a competitive Superleague club. This is the sort of thing the adequate business plan (which IS a standard) needs to add up to.

This is why (to keep it to Salford )

They are in schtuk, because they don't get those sort of attendances. They said it themselves.

Their 5,800 is not good enough.

"Those applied to SL clubs" implies a bit more than the numbers that may or may not be in a business plan........

Padge I hope some day life improves for you and science finds a way to stop the turds exiting your mouth.
Huddersfield were promoted averaging less than 2500 not too long ago, same with Salford and Crusaders. We know minimum standards are selective otherwise Cas wouldn't have got back in or HKR at all.
The fact is that we have 2 divisions within SL and 3/4 clubs stranded within the desert island that is the Championship, but the structural gap between part time and top SL is huge and cannot be bridged with our current set up. If we had a two tier FT set up Salford could get relegated, regroup within a FT structure and potentially grow as a newly defined Manchester brand.
Our current structures breed a mixture desperation and apathy, change and vision are needed.

Padge I hope some day life improves for you and science finds a way to stop the turds exiting your mouth.Huddersfield were promoted averaging less than 2500 not too long ago, same with Salford and Crusaders. We know minimum standards are selective otherwise Cas wouldn't have got back in or HKR at all.The fact is that we have 2 divisions within SL and 3/4 clubs stranded within the desert island that is the Championship, but the structural gap between part time and top SL is huge and cannot be bridged with our current set up. If we had a two tier FT set up Salford could get relegated, regroup within a FT structure and potentially grow as a newly defined Manchester brand.Our current structures breed a mixture desperation and apathy, change and vision are needed.

I'll ignore your first line of abuse.

Huddersfield where promoted in to SL in 1998 with an average crowd for 1997 in div2 of 3,723, in 2002 they got 2,570 which is actually more than 2,500 by my maths, do you want to go away and check some facts before you continue.

I hope we can pull through, but it seems increasingly unlikely that we can pull a rabbit out of the hat in time to allow us to be anything other than whipping boys next year. I don't want that. I'd rather we accepted that the impossible dream is over and drop back down to the championship. It is only a game, when all is said and done.

I wonder where I will be watching my rugby next year? The KC? Odsal? Headingley? Nooooooo! I might just start watching York again after a gap of 30+ years.

Huddersfield where promoted in to SL in 1998 with an average crowd for 1997 in div2 of 3,723, in 2002 they got 2,570 which is actually more than 2,500 by my maths, do you want to go away and check some facts before you continue.

Your choice to ignore, my hope is for the cure.

I am glad you have access to that data and the time to look for it, was it just for league games or did it include the 5500 play off gate?

Whichever way you look at it several SL clubs seem to be in meltdown and i know of one other (Not including Reds/Tigers) that is seriously in the poo (And before anyone asks its not the Dragons or London or Hull KR)